quisph:Aussie_As: fusillade762: Aussie_As: fusillade762: You're assuming that they know what the true impact of Tea Party policies would be on their tax bill. I don't think most rank-and-file Tea Partiers are that well-informed. All they need to do is believe that it would lower their tax bill. They don't have to be right to be selfish.

That's a very interesting point. I hadn't thought about it from that angle. There must be quite a few Tea Partiers who don't even pay tax, but are looking forward to the day they get a tax cut.

Aussie_As:quisph: Aussie_As: fusillade762: Aussie_As: fusillade762: You're assuming that they know what the true impact of Tea Party policies would be on their tax bill. I don't think most rank-and-file Tea Partiers are that well-informed. All they need to do is believe that it would lower their tax bill. They don't have to be right to be selfish.

That's a very interesting point. I hadn't thought about it from that angle. There must be quite a few Tea Partiers who don't even pay tax, but are looking forward to the day they get a tax cut.

There's also the relatively deluded "I'm not rich now but someday I might be" angle.

fusillade762:Aussie_As: quisph: Aussie_As: fusillade762: Aussie_As: fusillade762: You're assuming that they know what the true impact of Tea Party policies would be on their tax bill. I don't think most rank-and-file Tea Partiers are that well-informed. All they need to do is believe that it would lower their tax bill. They don't have to be right to be selfish.

That's a very interesting point. I hadn't thought about it from that angle. There must be quite a few Tea Partiers who don't even pay tax, but are looking forward to the day they get a tax cut.

There's also the relatively deluded "I'm not rich now but someday I might be" angle.

That angle's overplayed. It's a (very flawed) rational argument that's based in political knowledge. Politically aware sorts think this is what's going on because they assume others are politically aware too.

Most of these tea party / hard right wing sorts aren't politically knowledgeable. It's a cultural sort of thing. If everyone you know believes a certain thing, that's a lot of incentive to believe that thing. It's not that far off from being a sports fan. I'm not going to stop liking the Mets just because the Yankees are better players or better people or what have you.

We're talking about people who can baaaaarely name anything Obama's done, probably don't know who the vice president is, and maybe will read/see one thing about Mitt Romney other than commercials before voting.

/Before I get too yelled at, there's a slew of these folks on all sides.

Dafatone:fusillade762: Aussie_As: quisph: Aussie_As: fusillade762: Aussie_As: fusillade762: You're assuming that they know what the true impact of Tea Party policies would be on their tax bill. I don't think most rank-and-file Tea Partiers are that well-informed. All they need to do is believe that it would lower their tax bill. They don't have to be right to be selfish.

That's a very interesting point. I hadn't thought about it from that angle. There must be quite a few Tea Partiers who don't even pay tax, but are looking forward to the day they get a tax cut.

There's also the relatively deluded "I'm not rich now but someday I might be" angle.

That angle's overplayed. It's a (very flawed) rational argument that's based in political knowledge. Politically aware sorts think this is what's going on because they assume others are politically aware too.

Most of these tea party / hard right wing sorts aren't politically knowledgeable. It's a cultural sort of thing. If everyone you know believes a certain thing, that's a lot of incentive to believe that thing. It's not that far off from being a sports fan. I'm not going to stop liking the Mets just because the Yankees are better players or better people or what have you.

We're talking about people who can baaaaarely name anything Obama's done, probably don't know who the vice president is, and maybe will read/see one thing about Mitt Romney other than commercials before voting.

/Before I get too yelled at, there's a slew of these folks on all sides.

Conservatives tend to be much more "team oriented" than liberals. Distrust of out groups is one of their defining characteristics. One look at how cohesive the Republican party is vs Democrats should demonstrate that pretty well.

Conservatives tend to be much more "team oriented" than liberals. Distrust of out groups is one of their defining characteristics. One look at how cohesive the Republican party is vs Democrats should demonstrate that pretty well.

It seems to be true in many parts of the world that as you go from the left to the right of the political spectrum, you find it becomes more disciplined. It's very depressing.

Conservatives tend to be much more "team oriented" than liberals. Distrust of out groups is one of their defining characteristics. One look at how cohesive the Republican party is vs Democrats should demonstrate that pretty well.

It seems to be true in many parts of the world that as you go from the left to the right of the political spectrum, you find it becomes more disciplined. It's very depressing.

Well, if liberal is "Let's change things!" and conservative is "Let's not change things!" then changing things opens the door to tons of options, while not changing things is pretty much one set of ideas.

Conservatives tend to be much more "team oriented" than liberals. Distrust of out groups is one of their defining characteristics. One look at how cohesive the Republican party is vs Democrats should demonstrate that pretty well.

It seems to be true in many parts of the world that as you go from the left to the right of the political spectrum, you find it becomes more disciplined. It's very depressing.

Well, if liberal is "Let's change things!" and conservative is "Let's not change things!" then changing things opens the door to tons of options, while not changing things is pretty much one set of ideas.

/Of course, conservatives in america want to change tons of things.

They want to change things back to a mythical time that never really existed.

ows is just time filler news. Don't waste a photographer on those bums, you've seen one ows stinkhippie and you've seen them all.Here's something interesting. This is the obamorons and demtards pretending to thank American Veterans with a backdrop using the RUSSIAN NAVY at the dem convention.

Aussie_As:quisph: Aussie_As: fusillade762: Aussie_As: fusillade762: You're assuming that they know what the true impact of Tea Party policies would be on their tax bill. I don't think most rank-and-file Tea Partiers are that well-informed. All they need to do is believe that it would lower their tax bill. They don't have to be right to be selfish.

That's a very interesting point. I hadn't thought about it from that angle. There must be quite a few Tea Partiers who don't even pay tax, but are looking forward to the day they get a tax cut.

I'm a registered Libertarian with lots of Tea Party sympathies. Many people in my family identify with the Tea Party as (stupid, I know) Republican voters. Look, it's as simple as this: We don't believe that it is/should be the function of government to take things from some people and give them to others.

I am poor. I will probably receive more money back in tax refunds/rebates/wealth redistribution for this year's taxes than I paid in federal income tax. That is wrong, flat out. I am not owed any money by any level of government, especially when that money was forcibly taken from someone else who worked very hard for it.

Compassionate libertarians like myself believe that it is right and good for wealthy people to contribute to the well-being of their communities. Some do, and some do not. The facade of government helps no one, though. Some government officials and programs really do aim to help people, and some are selfish and self-interested. On one hand, we have people who will help and care about others, and on the other hand, we have the self-serving. It happens in government as well as among the citizenry, because (news flash!) the government is actually composed of human beings, even if they hide behind papers and policies and the anonymity of institutions.

I am someone who believes I am more intelligent than most wealthy people, and yet I believe that it continues to be their responsibility to help and to form their communities with their time, money, and talents, and it is not the duty of elected representatives to wrestle money away from them in vain attempt to promote the lumpenproletariat to the status of privileged elite.

Tea partiers generally do not care so much about the economics of tax cuts for businesses/wealthy people as much as they favor basic financial responsibility and they oppose government intrusion into social and financial matters. They just get sucked into Republican strategies for reasons of pragmatism and/or ignorance. They still believe it's a better road than liberal progressivism.

BoxOfBees:Aussie_As: quisph: Aussie_As: fusillade762: Aussie_As: fusillade762: You're assuming that they know what the true impact of Tea Party policies would be on their tax bill. I don't think most rank-and-file Tea Partiers are that well-informed. All they need to do is believe that it would lower their tax bill. They don't have to be right to be selfish.

That's a very interesting point. I hadn't thought about it from that angle. There must be quite a few Tea Partiers who don't even pay tax, but are looking forward to the day they get a tax cut.

I'm a registered Libertarian with lots of Tea Party sympathies. Many people in my family identify with the Tea Party as (stupid, I know) Republican voters. Look, it's as simple as this: We don't believe that it is/should be the function of government to take things from some people and give them to others.

I am poor. I will probably receive more money back in tax refunds/rebates/wealth redistribution for this year's taxes than I paid in federal income tax. That is wrong, flat out. I am not owed any money by any level of government, especially when that money was forcibly taken from someone else who worked very hard for it.

Compassionate libertarians like myself believe that it is right and good for wealthy people to contribute to the well-being of their communities. Some do, and some do not. The facade of government helps no one, though. Some government officials and programs really do aim to help people, and some are selfish and self-interested. On one hand, we have people who will help and care about others, and on the other hand, we have the self-serving. It happens in government as well as among the citizenry, because (news flash!) the government is actually composed of human beings, even if they hide behind papers and policies and the anonymity of institutions.

I am someone who believes I am more intelligent than most wealthy people, and yet I believe that it continues to be their responsibility to help and to form their ...

You know, government would probably work better if half of our elected officials weren't dedicated to making government suck.

Dafatone:I am someone who believes I am more intelligent than most wealthy people, and yet I believe that it continues to be their responsibility to help and to form their ...

You know, government would probably work better if half of our elected officials weren't dedicated to making government suck.

"When the government is run by a political party committed to the belief that government is always the problem, never the solution, that belief tends to become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Key priorities are neglected; key functions are privatized; and key people, the competent public servants who make government work, either leave or are driven out."

- Paul Krugman

"Conservatives cannot govern well for the same reason that vegetarians cannot prepare a world-class beef bourguignon: If you believe that what you are called upon to do is wrong, you are not likely to do it very well. As a way of governing, conservatism is another name for disaster."

fusillade762:BoxOfBees: We don't believe that it is/should be the function of government to take things from some people and give them to others.

So what SHOULD government be doing? And how should they pay for it?

This. @BoxOfBees, I have no doubt you're intelligent and genuine in your views. But your view does not take into account the need to rectify inherent injustices in the system. I would have NO sympathy for supporting poor communities who were deliberately poor by their own choice. This would be economic madness. But when communities are poor because of structural racism or other discrimination, either in current times or in the past, these things will not just simply right themselves. I'm talking "inner city" communities, communities hit by the closure of factories because right-wing governments have sent jobs overseas (usually for no better reason than to weaken trade unions) and communities established for some probably forgotten reason but then never provided the resources to flourish. Income redistribution, preferably through the form of programs which educate and set folks up to succeed, is absolutely necessary. Else crime flourishes, drugs are widespread, and the whole mess only gets much worse and harder again to solve.

You're not wealthy, you shouldn't have a hard time seeing my point of view. Whether you adopt this viewpoint is a matter for yourself.